Latest / Brett Keane and Eve Show / Christian DARTH DAWKINS VS Atheist Mark Reid

Transcript

Christian DARTH DAWKINS VS Atheist Mark Reid · Brett Keane and Eve Show

• 0:20
  That he told me that he's waiting.
• 0:22
  That Gavin now has changed his mind.
• 0:25
  He wants to debate on the channel, but he wants things to
• 0:27
  cool down. On earth?
• 0:30
  Then just give me the one-on-one with Crips here and tell Gavin
• 0:32
  and sit on a fight. He needs a popsicle.
• 0:39
  Cool down. A popsicle in the enema.
• 0:43
  Here you go. Have a popsicle say.
• 0:46
  Appreciate it. Hey, Kevin, Nice to see you.
• 0:50
  I like what Kevin said. Popsicle in an enema.
• 0:56
  Here we got more. Agree.
• 0:57
  What's going on? Good to see you, Mark.
• 0:59
  Thanks for coming in. Thanks.
• 1:01
  How are you guys doing hanging in there?
• 1:06
  Yeah, I only met King Man recently.
• 1:08
  Hey, and that was an experience. And 1/2 that was a bit crazy.
• 1:14
  Interesting guy though. I mean, I did like talking to
• 1:16
  him, but yeah, yeah, apparently he's a short fused guy that will
• 1:23
  stay death threats to you if you piss him off, so.
• 1:27
  That's no good. Come on now.
• 1:29
  Sounds familiar? Come on now, nothing's worth
• 1:33
  throwing that kind of stuff. Yeah.
• 1:36
  And I was listening to you guys talk and and like you had a lot
• 1:40
  to say about atheists like me, like like where of the OR.
• 1:44
  You said we've been influenced by the devil and we know that
• 1:48
  that the Bible is true, but don't believe it.
• 1:50
  And you know, I mean I I don't want to tell you what to believe
• 1:53
  and you're free to believe that. But I was wondering why you
• 1:56
  believe that? Like why you think that I
• 1:59
  believe in something that and I say, I don't.
• 2:02
  I'm just wondering like what's the rationale for that?
• 2:07
  I'm not saying that you believe in something that you don't
• 2:10
  because you wouldn't be of the ones that leave.
• 2:17
  Like, how do I word this? Because you do not believe in
• 2:22
  God, right? Have you ever came to a Jesus to
• 2:28
  Christ and thought that you did believe?
• 2:33
  No, I don't. I don't think I've ever, like,
• 2:36
  found myself believing in any religion really.
• 2:41
  I was raised in a very secular household, so I'm not an ex
• 2:45
  religion. I was sort of pantheist at one
• 2:49
  point. Like I sort of thought that the
• 2:50
  the universe was God, but that that didn't last very long.
• 2:55
  And yeah, so I've never, I've never had any kind of.
• 3:04
  Yeah, I've never had any any belief in God at all.
• 3:08
  So now have you studied the word of God, the Old and the New
• 3:14
  Testament? Like, especially the salvation
• 3:19
  of Jesus Christ. Well, yeah, I have.
• 3:20
  I have read them. I can't say that I've studied
• 3:23
  them in depth. I wish I could and had the time
• 3:27
  to study every religious text out there.
• 3:30
  But there's a lot of them. I I do remember it was certainly
• 3:34
  an easier read than the the Book of Mormon.
• 3:36
  That thing was ridiculous. It was.
• 3:38
  Yeah, I'm not speaking about the the Book of Mormon.
• 3:46
  Yeah, yeah, I've read it. I'm just Speaking of just the
• 3:43
  regular whole the Holy Bible. Just the holy.
• 3:48
  I'm not. I'm not sure what you mean by
• 3:50
  studied it, though. I mean, I haven't.
• 3:52
  Gone to any Have you searched through the scriptures?
• 3:56
  Have you read about the death and resurrection of Jesus
• 4:00
  Christ? Have you read?
• 4:02
  Where Christ came from? The House of Israel, yes.
• 4:05
  And that's. Yeah, I've read that, yeah.
• 4:08
  Well then you would go along with those that are along the
• 4:12
  path and have heard the word of God.
• 4:16
  And then the devil came up, and he removed it so that seed of
• 4:21
  the word of God. It.
• 4:23
  Came into your heart, yeah. So what do you mean?
• 4:27
  So I'm a little confused because I I haven't like when you say
• 4:30
  heard the word of God, I'm. I'm assuming you're not talking
• 4:34
  about something audible there, you're talking about.
• 4:36
  There you go. There you go.
• 4:38
  It's the gospel. Yeah, we're talking about the
• 4:40
  gospel message. Yeah, Yeah.
• 4:42
  To reconcile centers with God. That's that's the gospel
• 4:46
  message. Yeah, I'm.
• 4:48
  Making my point there, Mark, because there there's no faith,
• 4:51
  nothing came about from it. Well, I'm kind of assuming
• 4:57
  that's what you mean, but I haven't had anything like that
• 5:00
  happen to me. There's there's been no.
• 5:03
  It's that simple. Yeah, No.
• 5:04
  Say, and that's what Sparrow was talking.
• 5:08
  About OK. That is simple.
• 5:09
  No faith. So, So what do you define as
• 5:13
  faith? What?
• 5:14
  What would you say faith is like?
• 5:16
  What? Would trust it doesn't.
• 5:18
  Read them. Read them.
• 5:18
  That parable trust in God. Just trust in God.
• 5:25
  Yeah. What?
• 5:25
  He's revealed his revelation and scripture.
• 5:28
  Yeah, trust in that. Yeah, so.
• 5:31
  Maybe. Maybe if you read Mark that
• 5:33
  parable. Which one?
• 5:35
  You'll understand it more. Yes bro.
• 5:37
  Do you want? Do you want Do you want to read
• 5:39
  it, honey? Well, see if Mark wants to hear
• 5:41
  it first. You don't want to.
• 5:42
  I'm happy to hear it. No, I'm happy to hear it.
• 5:44
  That that's fine. Yeah, I'm happy because you
• 5:46
  don't want to Bible you know, Bash.
• 5:48
  What is it called? No, I I I know that.
• 5:50
  Yeah, I know that. You're not like that, that
• 5:52
  that's fine. That's fine.
• 5:54
  We we don't definitely do not want to push anything on on you,
• 5:58
  OK. Well, I appreciate that.
• 6:00
  But I am asking, you know, I am asking why you think that I
• 6:05
  because it sort of sounded like you sort of said, well, I know
• 6:07
  already. And So what I'm getting is that
• 6:10
  you're sort of inferring that reading the Bible gives me this
• 6:14
  knowledge and then it's taken away by the devil.
• 6:17
  And I'm not sure I. I'm not sure I believe that.
• 6:23
  I'm sorry. You know, I I just don't don't
• 6:25
  see that. Funny.
• 6:27
  Okay. Well, I will, I will read this.
• 6:29
  Okay, it says. And when the his disciple asked
• 6:33
  him what this parable meant, he said to you, it has been given
• 6:39
  to know the secrets of the Kingdom of God, But for others
• 6:43
  they are in parables. So that seeing they may not see,
• 6:48
  and hearing they might may not understand.
• 6:52
  Now the parable is this. The seed is the word of God, the
• 6:57
  ones along the path, or those who have heard.
• 7:01
  Then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts,
• 7:07
  so they may not believe and be saved.
• 7:12
  And the. Yeah, and the ones on the rock
• 7:15
  are those who, when they hear the word, receive it with joy.
• 7:19
  But these have no root. They believe for a while and in
• 7:25
  time of testing fall away. Yes, And I suppose that's where
• 7:31
  I have the problem, because I don't believe in in a devil
• 7:34
  either. I don't.
• 7:35
  I don't believe in any of that. So.
• 7:39
  Gives grace approval. That's that's the problem.
• 7:42
  I'm sorry. God resists the proud who gives
• 7:47
  grace to the humble. That's your problem.
• 7:50
  Well, I I kind of. I don't think I'm very proud at
• 7:54
  all. I think I'm humble enough to
• 7:56
  know that I'm fallible. OK, I I don't know why you'd say
• 8:02
  that, but I mean, that's your opinion.
• 8:04
  You're welcome to it. That's fine.
• 8:07
  I don't think I am. I just.
• 8:09
  I'm humble enough to know that I can be mistaken about stuff.
• 8:13
  And I guess my problem is that when you say sort of these
• 8:18
  things about the heart, the heart isn't.
• 8:22
  I mean, it's a pump for blood. It's not like you know.
• 8:26
  Sort of. I don't see anything.
• 8:29
  I'm sorry to cut you off, Sir, but when we say hard, we're not
• 8:31
  talking about your organ in your chest that's beating.
• 8:33
  We're talking about your mind, your thought processes.
• 8:36
  OK. OK.
• 8:37
  Materials, maybe I'm taking that a bit literally then.
• 8:40
  So so my thought processes will that that sure they're fallible.
• 8:44
  I've been wrong about plenty of things before.
• 8:48
  So I don't see sort of a faith as in trust in what you think.
• 8:55
  I think I need stuff to back it up.
• 8:57
  Sort of more evidence to back it up because, but I've thought
• 9:01
  wrong things before. To just blindly believe and not
• 9:05
  bring our brains along with us. There are sure evidence that the
• 9:07
  reasons to believe the Bible there's fulfilled prophecies.
• 9:10
  We have ancient historical writings that validate that
• 9:12
  Christ indeed did go to the cross.
• 9:15
  The Jesus is not just, it's a historical fact.
• 9:17
  Jesus existed that he was crucified, and that his
• 9:20
  disciples thought that they saw him after he was crucified.
• 9:23
  Why would someone be willing to go to their death knowing if
• 9:26
  they they lied that they saw this this Jesus again after he
• 9:30
  was crucified? Why would Peter be willing to be
• 9:34
  put to death? Yeah, there's there's a lot of
• 9:36
  reasons why people, and I'm not saying they lied.
• 9:40
  They could have been mistaken. They could have been tricked.
• 9:43
  There's a lot of reasons why people say things that didn't.
• 9:46
  And don't get me wrong, I'm not a mythicist.
• 9:48
  I don't, I don't sort of say, hey, that Jesus was a myth.
• 9:52
  I just. I just have no reason to believe
• 9:55
  that he was some sort of God. But a lot of people say a lot of
• 10:01
  different stuff for a myriad of reasons.
• 10:03
  Like it could be that they felt their movement was so important
• 10:09
  they could have thought he was a God and not.
• 10:13
  But the problem is that the the Bible like for instance.
• 10:17
  They claimed they saw him after he was crucified.
• 10:19
  Well, whether or not somebody's willing to die for something
• 10:22
  doesn't really give us whether it's true or not.
• 10:25
  For instance, the people that did the 9/11 bombings that ran
• 10:28
  themselves into buildings that they were prepared to die for
• 10:31
  what they believe, that doesn't make what they believe true.
• 10:35
  Was it because of the evidence, Mark?
• 10:38
  Did they did that of Islam? Or is it because they wanted an
• 10:41
  afterlife? Sort of.
• 10:44
  Oh, I believe pleasure like a pleasure, like getting 70
• 10:47
  virgins or something. I think that was, yeah.
• 10:50
  Sure. You know and.
• 10:52
  Can I ask the question? Yeah, sure.
• 10:54
  Yeah, go ahead. Mark you you're asking for
• 10:57
  evidence to believe in God, am I correct?
• 11:00
  That is correct, yes. Well, I think, I think in some
• 11:04
  ways like I'm not asking for, I just want to clarify.
• 11:07
  I'm not asking for scientific evidence.
• 11:09
  I think that. In some way, though, the
• 11:12
  methodology behind that evidence should be reliable.
• 11:17
  It has to be a way that we can demonstrate that it actually has
• 11:20
  explanatory power. Okay.
• 11:25
  So you want the God world. In order to accept the God
• 11:28
  world, you want it to be demonstrated.
• 11:31
  Is that correct? Well, I think I would need some
• 11:35
  sort of justification for it outside of just the mind.
• 11:40
  Yeah, I think that there's plenty.
• 11:42
  Of things you want in our mind. That.
• 11:45
  That we don't believe because you know.
• 11:47
  This is so you want the God world to be demonstrated to you,
• 11:50
  Is that correct? Well, I mean, I don't need it to
• 11:53
  be demonstrated. I'm doing just fine.
• 11:55
  But you know, I was interested in the conversation about.
• 11:58
  Why I'm asking a very non controversial question, yeah.
• 12:02
  You don't believe in the God world?
• 12:04
  Well, in order for me to the way I finish.
• 12:08
  Yeah, sure. I mean, I think you're turning a
• 12:11
  very simple question into a pretzel here.
• 12:14
  Well, I'm just trying to clarify.
• 12:15
  That the UK mark? No, My question requires no
• 12:20
  clarification. You do not believe in the God
• 12:23
  world, correct? That is correct, yes.
• 12:27
  OK, do you need what do you need in order to believe in the God
• 12:31
  world? Is it evidence?
• 12:32
  Demonstrability. Is that it?
• 12:34
  Yeah. I believe strong evidence, IE
• 12:36
  that's which rigorous, reliable evidence that have robust
• 12:42
  foundation in, you know, repeatability and able to be
• 12:47
  demonstrated basically, yeah. OK.
• 12:49
  Do you believe in the Not God World Mark?
• 12:51
  Do I believe in the Not God world?
• 12:54
  I'm not sure what you mean by that.
• 12:56
  I'm. I'm not a, I'm not a.
• 12:58
  There's only, there's only two there's only two possible
• 13:02
  worlds. There's the God world and the
• 13:04
  not God world. Well, ontologically that's true.
• 13:08
  That's right. So you're going to be operating
• 13:11
  from and believing one or the other.
• 13:13
  So you don't believe in the God world.
• 13:16
  So are you are operating from the Not God world?
• 13:20
  Well, it sounds like that you're trying to sort of say, am I a
• 13:24
  naturalist? Basically, Is naturalism my
• 13:26
  thing? No, I didn't.
• 13:27
  Ask you that question. I didn't ask you that.
• 13:29
  That's what it sounds. Like you are you operate, do you
• 13:33
  believe that the Not God world is true?
• 13:38
  Yes, I believe that provisionally, I believe.
• 13:40
  That OK, what is? What is the What is the
• 13:44
  reliable, testable, demonstrable evidence for that?
• 13:49
  That we have interacted with all kinds of minds, and those minds
• 13:55
  require a brain. Now, provisionally, I will say
• 13:59
  that if you can show me a mind without a brain, as we have
• 14:03
  experienced in the billions of brains that we've seen or minds
• 14:07
  that we've seen rather I I will. You know, I will at least go to
• 14:13
  agnosticism, say I don't know, but.
• 14:16
  I provisionally I believe that you're answering a brain to have
• 14:20
  a mind. Yeah, now you're talking about
• 14:24
  brains and minds. I'm simply asking you what
• 14:28
  demonstrates that the Not God world is true.
• 14:32
  I. Just.
• 14:34
  Told you. Well, I heard you talking about
• 14:36
  brains. Yeah, yeah, cuz someone asked
• 14:39
  for me. Yeah.
• 14:40
  You didn't you didn't give me a clear answer.
• 14:42
  I. Think we should go to timed
• 14:44
  responses? Maybe.
• 14:46
  I mean, I'm happy to talk. OK you know I'm more.
• 14:49
  I think Mark's so right. That's that's a good idea if it
• 14:51
  kind of gets. I think Mark can handle it
• 14:54
  though. He's one of the atheists.
• 14:55
  I'm I'm gonna give him credit on that.
• 14:57
  I think he'll hang in there. But Mark, if you get like irked
• 15:00
  or something we'll put in the time responses.
• 15:02
  But go ahead and continue. No worries.
• 15:05
  Yeah, I I think wants. You to explain to me succinctly.
• 15:09
  Why the not God world is true? Yes, so every description of
• 15:13
  God, and I must admit I probably shouldn't presume that you are a
• 15:17
  person that subscribes to this, but every description I've got
• 15:21
  is a mind without a brain, a you know, sort of all all powerful,
• 15:28
  all knowing or at least maximally.
• 15:30
  So people usually say and you know to clarify if this this
• 15:35
  description of God isn't what you believe, but.
• 15:39
  The description is almost always a mind without a brain, and the
• 15:45
  evidence that I have seen is overwhelming that a mind
• 15:50
  requires a brain and then we have that through buildings.
• 15:53
  And buildings and buildings and. Things.
• 15:56
  Now, I've done not committing the Black Swan fallacy because
• 15:59
  I'm not saying it isn't possible that there's a mind without a
• 16:02
  brain, just I provisionally believe that's the case because
• 16:06
  of the evidence suggests a mind has to have a brain and that's
• 16:09
  why I believe it. Now I just want to clarify
• 16:12
  quickly. I don't claim to know it
• 16:13
  outright. I don't claim absolute knowledge
• 16:15
  of this. It is a provisional belief that
• 16:17
  I have based upon the evidence that I've seen.
• 16:22
  So God doesn't exist because. God necessarily does not exist
• 16:27
  because you have a provisional belief.
• 16:28
  I didn't say necessarily. I said provisional.
• 16:31
  I mean the two things. I'm asking, I'm asking your
• 16:34
  position is. Well, the two things are
• 16:36
  incompatible. I mean if I say.
• 16:39
  Provision is not necessarily does not exist.
• 16:42
  No, no. If I say provisionally, I'm not
• 16:44
  saying that God necessarily doesn't exist.
• 16:48
  I'm saying I believe that God doesn't exist based upon the
• 16:52
  evidence that I've seen. Does it follow necessarily that
• 16:57
  God does not exist because you don't believe in Him?
• 17:01
  I just just said no. But you asked me for my beliefs.
• 17:03
  OK, Well then that then, then you don't have a demonstrable
• 17:07
  case that God does not exist? No, no, I've just gave given you
• 17:09
  the case. No, you're not.
• 17:12
  You didn't understand the analysis.
• 17:14
  OK. I think you're looking for an
• 17:18
  ontological truth here, and while we're talking.
• 17:14
  No, no, I think your. About asking you to explain to
• 17:22
  me what the demonstrable, repeatable, testimal evidence is
• 17:26
  that God indeed does not exist. And you are telling me God does
• 17:31
  not and cannot exist because you don't have a belief in him,
• 17:34
  because he would be an unembodied mind.
• 17:37
  That's a non sequitur. I never said that, and I never
• 17:39
  claimed to have ontological knowledge over over whether God
• 17:43
  exists or not. So you're just sort of smuggling
• 17:46
  in an ontological truth into what you're asking me, which is
• 17:50
  epistemology. God doesn't exist.
• 17:53
  No, no. You've asked me for my
• 17:55
  epistemology, and then now you're asking me for an
• 17:58
  ontological truth. I'm asking you to explain to me
• 18:02
  why the Not God world is true. Is the not God world true
• 18:07
  because you? Your provisional belief is
• 18:12
  inconsistent with God being true.
• 18:14
  Is that why God doesn't exist? No, it that doesn't make the
• 18:17
  ontological truth anything but the ontological truth.
• 18:20
  The truth will be the truth, regardless of whether I believe
• 18:24
  it to be. Truth.
• 18:25
  Or whether I believe it to be something else.
• 18:28
  You have asked me why I'm an atheist and I say I have
• 18:31
  evidence of a lot of brains that have minds and no minds that
• 18:36
  don't have brains, and that is what I base my belief on.
• 18:40
  Well, I mean, I am talking, I'm, I'm sort of talking at the
• 18:43
  moment. I know that, but you're you're
• 18:45
  rambling. I'm.
• 18:47
  I'm addressing. The You're rambling Like, like
• 18:50
  like I'm a 9th grade student here.
• 19:06
  I'm asking confusing ontology with epistemology.
• 18:52
  I'm a grown man. I'm 61 years old.
• 18:54
  I've talked with hundreds if not thousands of atheists from all
• 18:57
  different backgrounds, including a good number of atheists with
• 19:01
  PhDs. I've debated hundreds if not
• 19:03
  thousands of atheists. And you're just giving me a
• 19:05
  verbal? To the question, I mean you're
• 19:11
  confusing the two. Complicated.
• 19:13
  I'm not finished, Mark. Right.
• 19:15
  I'm very much accustomed to people monologuing and running
• 19:19
  the clock out. I'm asking you a very succinct
• 19:21
  question. OK, yeah.
• 19:22
  God does not exist because you don't have a mental state.
• 19:27
  No, no, I never said God does not exist.
• 19:30
  I believe God does not exist because of the factors that I
• 19:35
  have no difference. Well, what do you want?
• 19:37
  You want the ontological truth or on a piston model?
• 19:40
  I want you to explain to me in clear terms.
• 19:43
  I want you to explain to me in clear terms where you're not
• 19:47
  rambling and monologuing Okay. It would be clear to a 9th
• 19:51
  grader, God does not exist because now does God not exist
• 19:56
  because there is something else that is ultimate and absolute
• 20:00
  and that it's not God? So you're conflating ontology
• 20:04
  with epistemology, I don't believe.
• 20:06
  God, that is. At least focus on what I I never
• 20:08
  said I made a knowledge claim about God.
• 20:11
  Did I? Did I ever say I made a
• 20:12
  knowledge claim? OK, OK, knowledge is a subset of
• 20:15
  beliefs, so whether you want to classify it, whether you want to
• 20:19
  classify it as knowledge or belief is irrelevant to my
• 20:23
  question to you. OK, now you believe God does not
• 20:27
  exist. So do you believe that?
• 20:31
  Indeed, God does not exist because you have a belief, A
• 20:35
  provisional belief, that is inconsistent with the existence
• 20:39
  of God. Do I believe?
• 20:41
  And just let me get I want to get this straight.
• 20:44
  I don't want to misquote you, but I do.
• 20:53
  Are we going to do this, Mark? I believe that God indeed.
• 20:48
  And I'm not sure what you're mean by indeed, so we'll get
• 20:51
  back to that. Indeed does not.
• 20:55
  I'm just going through trying to analyze the question.
• 20:57
  Because it's phrase word indeed. Well, I've got to pass it.
• 21:01
  I mean you might mean many things by that.
• 21:04
  And I really need to know what you mean because you basically
• 21:07
  said you believe God in does indeed does not exist because
• 21:12
  you have a belief that God does not exist.
• 21:16
  Is that what you said? You know, Mark, you're giving me
• 21:20
  the verbal runaround and you're verbally running the clock out.
• 21:23
  OK, as I told you about trying to brag, wait away on the.
• 21:27
  Clock give you a hard time, but I'm a straightforward individual
• 21:30
  like I'm a straight shooter. OK, I don't mince words I'm not
• 21:34
  getting. Now, OK, Mark, I'd like to
• 21:36
  finish. OK.
• 21:38
  I have, as I told you I've. I've talked to and debated with
• 21:41
  thousands of atheists. OK, many highly intelligent,
• 21:45
  highly educated atheist as well. You sound like a certainly
• 21:48
  highly intelligent individual, but to me you're giving me the
• 21:53
  verbal runaround. All I need to know is is God
• 21:57
  does not exist either because there's something else that is
• 22:02
  ultimate that's not God or. There's another proposition that
• 22:08
  derives from what is ultimate That is not God.
• 22:11
  Which is it? So Does God not exist because
• 22:15
  something else is ultimate? And what was the other last part
• 22:18
  of it? That there's a proposition that
• 22:22
  derives from something that is ultimate, That's not God.
• 22:28
  That derives from not God of the proposition.
• 22:32
  That you do, there's a proposition that you hold to
• 22:35
  that you consider demonstrable. So what do you mean by?
• 22:38
  That that mitigates against God. What do you mean by that?
• 22:41
  Which would be what is whatever is absolute, unconditionally non
• 22:46
  dependent and derivative. And being the absolute,
• 22:50
  everything that exists that is not itself derives and depends
• 22:53
  upon it. So I think that that sort of
• 23:01
  you're asking what something is the ultimate, ultimate so, so,
• 23:08
  so it everything relies on that thing.
• 23:12
  In order to in order to falsify God, yeah, you have to do one of
• 23:18
  two things. You're either going to have to
• 23:20
  present what is ultimate, which would be a negator for God
• 23:24
  because God is in the category of ultimate.
• 23:28
  Or you're going to have to give me some demonstrable proposition
• 23:32
  that derives from what is ultimate, that is not God.
• 23:37
  You have to do one of those two things.
• 23:39
  If you don't fulfill either two of those criterion, then you
• 23:44
  haven't falsified God, right? Well, I.
• 23:46
  Understand. Yeah.
• 23:48
  I sort of split it into. I have a apparent reality that I
• 23:52
  interact with, and an absolute reality, which is basically the
• 23:58
  ontological existence of things, the ontological truth of things,
• 24:05
  I'm not sure which which question.
• 24:07
  Are you answering the first or the second one?
• 24:09
  Well, I mean, you're asking what's ultimate, So I'm trying
• 24:12
  to get at that. No, I'm asking you which one are
• 24:14
  you answering, The first one or the second one?
• 24:17
  What do you mean? Aren't they the same thing, the
• 24:19
  proposition? Derives from in order to falsify
• 24:22
  God. Yeah, it's ultimate.
• 24:24
  You're going to have to tell me what is ultimate that is not
• 24:26
  God. Or you're going to have to tell
• 24:28
  me that there's a proposition that is demonstrable that
• 24:32
  derives from what is ultimate. That's not God.
• 24:35
  You have to do one or the other, otherwise you can't falsify or
• 24:40
  negate God. Which do you choose?
• 24:43
  Yes. So I can demonstrate the
• 24:45
  proposition that derives from absolute reality, and that is by
• 24:51
  basically acknowledging that because I directly experience
• 24:56
  sensations, therefore something must exist.
• 24:59
  Therefore, an absolute reality must exist.
• 25:04
  No, I you're not understanding the question.
• 25:06
  OK. Well, it's, it's kind of.
• 25:08
  Reality. Reality is is an abstraction
• 25:13
  that quantifies the set of all real things.
• 25:16
  I'm sorry, you're. Asking you that sounded like you
• 25:19
  said reality isn't real. No, I said.
• 25:23
  Reality is an abstraction. We want the abstraction set of.
• 25:27
  The abstraction reality is a. I'm trying to explain it to you.
• 25:32
  When we invoke the word reality, Sure.
• 25:35
  Typically what is referred to in English is that we're referring
• 25:39
  to the set of all real things. Okay.
• 25:42
  Now, all I'd ask asking you is in order to falsify God.
• 25:48
  Your position is not God. In order to negate or falsify
• 25:52
  God, since God is in the category of what is ultimate,
• 25:56
  and I've already defined ultimate, you're either gonna
• 25:59
  have to tell me what is ultimate or you will use a proposition, A
• 26:03
  demonstrable proposition, as a defeater for God.
• 26:07
  But that proposition. Must derive and depend upon what
• 26:12
  is ultimate. Otherwise you don't have a
• 26:14
  defeater. Now you have to pick one of
• 26:17
  those two, otherwise you can't falsify God.
• 26:20
  So which do you choose? Now this is the third time so.
• 26:22
  So absolute reality cannot be an abstraction because the one
• 26:26
  property I didn't handle is is that it is real.
• 26:31
  So I refute that completely. I think that even though my
• 26:36
  apparent reality may be separated in different things, I
• 26:39
  think a ultimate or absolute reality is just one thing and
• 26:44
  the I'm not. Talking about reality, Mark and
• 26:46
  the differences are actually kind of an illusion when you get
• 26:51
  down to it. Can you even hear me?
• 26:53
  Well, yeah, yeah, I'm explaining to you why I.
• 26:56
  Did I didn't ask you to give me an exposition on reality?
• 26:59
  I asked you, I'm sharing it with you anyway.
• 27:01
  Ultimate or what proposition that you use to negate God What
• 27:08
  I just told you. Depend upon I want to know what
• 27:10
  is ultimate. I just told you.
• 27:15
  What is that? An absolute reality, which is
• 27:18
  one thing, even though it's. Incoherent, you know.
• 27:21
  Want to know why? OK, I mean, when you say reality
• 27:25
  is reality the set of all real things?
• 27:27
  No, because a certain is an abstraction and the one property
• 27:31
  of reality is. That reality, reality is not the
• 27:34
  set of all real things. So there's something that may
• 27:36
  ask. A question inside of reality Is
• 27:38
  reality real? OK, Mark, I'm asking how you're
• 27:43
  defining reality is do you define reality as the set of all
• 27:47
  real things? OK, what is reality?
• 27:51
  So I think my apparent reality is the set of all things.
• 27:55
  But an absolute reality is the actual ontology behind it, as I
• 27:59
  told you earlier. So I'm asking you, do you think
• 28:03
  reality is real? It's it's a really simple
• 28:05
  question. OK, it's a it's a it's.
• 28:08
  It's like if I said, do you think bananas are real?
• 28:11
  Yeah, I think banana bananas are real.
• 28:14
  Reality to me is the set of all real things.
• 28:16
  Everything that's in that set is real.
• 28:18
  Now what I want to know to you from you is this.
• 28:21
  When we conceptualize reality, and by the way your your your
• 28:24
  non acceptance of the definition is is is extremely bizarre.
• 28:29
  OK, because when people invoke reality in the English language,
• 28:33
  they're generally referring to the set of all real things or
• 28:36
  particular. Subset of that.
• 28:38
  OK now what I want to know from you is.
• 28:41
  What is it that is ultimate from which all things depend and
• 28:46
  derive? If you answer reality, that's an
• 28:48
  incoherent answer which I will be quiet be glad to explain to
• 28:51
  you. So is that your answer?
• 28:55
  Well, I mean, I don't know where absolute reality came from, but
• 29:01
  because I don't have access to it, I can demonstrate through my
• 29:06
  argument that I know it exists, but I don't actually have
• 29:10
  access. All I've got access to is my
• 29:12
  apparent reality, as do you as. Can you tell me what is
• 29:15
  ultimate? What is ultimate?
• 29:18
  So by ultimate, you meant sorry, I must.
• 29:23
  Have absolute, unconditionally non dependent and derivative
• 29:27
  from which all things derive and dependent.
• 29:30
  No, I don't. I don't think I can tell you
• 29:32
  that. I don't think I can.
• 29:34
  I know what something is that the.
• 29:37
  Whole fact is, do you believe that something is ultimate?
• 29:42
  I don't know. Okay.
• 29:45
  So you have nothing that is identifiably ultimate then, Is
• 29:48
  that correct? I have nothing that's, well, I
• 29:51
  mean, I do have absolute reality.
• 29:54
  So I mean there's that. No, that's not.
• 29:58
  That is not. Why not?
• 30:01
  That is not an answer that is germane to the question.
• 30:04
  OK, well, all I want to know is, do you have an identifiable,
• 30:07
  defensible stipulation of what is ultimate?
• 30:10
  Yeah, absolute reality. I see it more as no, that's
• 30:13
  incoherent. Let me explain to you as a
• 30:15
  summation of the universe, the cosmos, and all things combined.
• 30:21
  Well, I mean, I've been. Listening Listen for a second.
• 30:24
  I'm trying to explain to you by saying absolute reality is
• 30:27
  ultimate is not coherent. Let me tell you why.
• 30:29
  OK, I want you to imagine when we use the word reality, we're
• 30:33
  referring to the set of all real things.
• 30:35
  OK, can you accept that working definition?
• 30:37
  I would accept that for my apparent reality.
• 30:39
  I wouldn't for. Can you accept that word
• 30:42
  definition, Mark? I would for my apparent reality.
• 30:45
  I wouldn't for I. Wouldn't say you're accepting
• 30:47
  that working, definitely. That reality is the set.
• 30:49
  OK, well, let's just for the sake of the argument just say
• 30:52
  that's the case. Mark.
• 30:54
  Why are you even listening? Or are you just trying to give
• 30:56
  me a monologue? No, I'm asking very truncated
• 31:00
  questions and I don't need a monologue back.
• 31:03
  Well, I'm just saying for the sake of.
• 31:04
  The argument I'm well accustomed to people filibustering me,
• 31:07
  Well, I'm just saying for the sake of the argument, I'm just.
• 31:10
  Saying shooter, OK. When you say I'm asking you what
• 31:15
  is what is it that is ultimate? I've already defined Ultimate
• 31:19
  for you, OK? Now are you saying, and I don't
• 31:22
  need a lecture? Are you saying that reality is
• 31:25
  what is ultimate? I?
• 31:29
  If your definition, and as I said for the sake of the
• 31:32
  argument, will assume that you're using your definition,
• 31:34
  then no, I wouldn't say that the set of all real things is is
• 31:39
  absolute or ultimate, no? OK, What is Ultimate Mark?
• 31:44
  It is. Let's see if I can describe an
• 31:46
  absolute reality in a way that is.
• 31:49
  No, I want you to tell me what ultimate.
• 31:51
  Well, it sounds. Like all things, That is a
• 31:54
  concrete one that all things derive.
• 31:56
  Yeah. So it sounds like to me that
• 31:58
  you're asking for what is ultimate in a way that I can't
• 32:02
  answer in any way except to say God, is that what you're doing?
• 32:07
  No, what I want to know from you is I want you to tell me from
• 32:10
  your perspective, yes, what you believe to be what is singularly
• 32:14
  concrete and not an abstract notion that all things derive
• 32:18
  and depend upon. Well, I've been trying, but you
• 32:20
  keep interrupting me. So maybe just let me spiel, I
• 32:24
  interrupt you. And then OK, well, I mean,
• 32:29
  you're asking the questions, and when I try to explain it, you're
• 32:32
  sort of cutting me off. It's very difficult to get
• 32:34
  something out when you won't let me talk.
• 32:36
  So as I said, there is an apparent reality we're all aware
• 32:40
  of, that we all agree on it. We all dwell in it.
• 32:42
  You know, sort of there is something behind that which I
• 32:46
  know that from my senses are imperfect.
• 32:49
  There is an ontological truth behind that that I can put a
• 32:55
  argument for. As I said, I experienced
• 32:58
  sensations directly. That means that there must be
• 33:01
  something exists, something real there, or else.
• 33:08
  And I'm not in any way due to hard souls, isn't saying why
• 33:12
  what it is. I am just saying there is
• 33:14
  something behind it. I think that is, or I believe
• 33:19
  that is the sum total of the universe, cosmos, everything
• 33:24
  that exists as one thing that just seems to be in individual
• 33:29
  parts. Like I think I'm here, I think
• 33:31
  you're there. That's my apparent reality, the
• 33:34
  set of all real things. As you said.
• 33:36
  I do not think that's the case. I think it is all one thing.
• 33:40
  Okay, Have you told me what is Ultimate Mark?
• 33:43
  Yeah, I just did. No, you didn't.
• 33:46
  I listened very carefully. It kept my mouth shut the whole
• 33:49
  time. All I got you there was
• 33:50
  monologuing. You did not tell me what was
• 33:52
  singularly concrete as opposed to an abstract notion.
• 33:56
  That all things derive and depend upon.
• 33:58
  What is that singular, concrete thing that is not an
• 34:01
  abstraction? Yeah, so I already said yeah, so
• 34:04
  I already said absolute reality. And you wouldn't take that for
• 34:07
  an answer. And that's the SO.
• 34:09
  Reality. So, reality So.
• 34:12
  But So what is ultimate is the set of all real things.
• 34:15
  Yeah, get rid of Josh. What I don't get and do?
• 34:18
  We get rid of Josh here. Please do excuse me.
• 34:21
  What I don't get is why do I have to come up with something
• 34:28
  ultimate and all of these designators to simply believe
• 34:33
  based upon the evidence that a God does not exist?
• 34:37
  Why is that? The case because it because if
• 34:40
  you don't it will not be rationally demonstrable.
• 34:44
  Now that sounds like a non reality to me.
• 34:46
  You. Said reality is reality, the set
• 34:49
  of all things. What is ultimate apparent
• 34:52
  reality is the set of all things.
• 34:55
  Am I correct in understanding that your position is that the
• 34:58
  set of all real things that you label reality is what is
• 35:01
  ultimate no? OK, Mark, what is it that is
• 35:06
  ultimate? I've already told you.
• 35:07
  Singularly concrete. OK, I'm.
• 35:09
  Testing the question again because all I heard was a
• 35:12
  monologue. You've had your answer.
• 35:15
  I want to know. I'll shut up on a If you had
• 35:17
  your answer from you. I'm not going through it again
• 35:20
  to know. From you, what is singularly
• 35:22
  concrete? And not an abstraction that all
• 35:25
  things derive and depend upon. What is that singular, concrete
• 35:28
  thing? Absolute reality.
• 35:31
  OK, is reality the set of all real things?
• 35:34
  No, not absolute reality. Our apparent reality.
• 35:38
  Can you tell me? OK, so absolute reality is a
• 35:41
  singular, concrete thing, yes? OK, what is that?
• 35:46
  I've explained it like three Times Now.
• 35:49
  If you're not paying attention, I'm not going to explain it
• 35:51
  again. I've been in thousands of
• 35:54
  debates and I've heard people explain things.
• 35:56
  Yeah, and I've heard complaints out of those thousands of people
• 35:59
  about you not listening. I I'm sure you do have a decent
• 36:03
  IQ. I'm 100% sure you do have a
• 36:05
  decent IQ. But it sounds like to me, when I
• 36:08
  explained that the sum total of the cosmos, everything outside
• 36:12
  of it, and everything that existed, will exist and ever
• 36:15
  existed, you basically say no, I'm not accepting that.
• 36:19
  And it seems like the only answer you will accept is God.
• 36:23
  What you just said Yeah, you keep going back.
• 36:25
  You are putting words in my mouth, going back to basically
• 36:28
  saying no, no, no. You keep going back.
• 36:32
  You keep going back to saying the set of all real things and
• 36:37
  I've already. Said.
• 36:39
  I've already said that's not the case.
• 36:40
  You don't. Give them a chance to.
• 36:41
  Answer when you say, oh, I've been sitting here silent quite a
• 36:44
  long time, listening to him go on and on and on and on, Erica.
• 36:48
  OK, what you don't like is the fact that I'm being
• 36:50
  confrontational, that I'm getting a whole long monologue
• 36:54
  without getting a clear answer. Now is absolute reality.
• 36:59
  Does anything else exist, independent or or outside of
• 37:05
  absolute reality, Mark? No.
• 37:08
  OK, so absolute reality then would be the set of all real
• 37:12
  things? No, that's our apparent reality.
• 37:14
  OK. OK.
• 37:15
  Well, that's what your position is now incoherent, OK.
• 37:19
  Because you see you. You want to talk about absolute
• 37:21
  reality. Yeah, get rid of Jack, who keeps
• 37:24
  on bringing these people, him, these people in here.
• 37:26
  Uh, praise. I don't know, but who is this
• 37:29
  really jacking strike though? Don't even entertain this.
• 37:30
  Is this a? Just give me What's wrong with
• 37:35
  jacking? Get rid of it.
• 37:37
  Why? Why?
• 37:38
  Why? Because those are those
• 37:39
  individuals are stalkers, Eric. Well, I'd like to talk to these
• 37:43
  people coming in. I find Mark was absolute.
• 37:47
  Reality. Is absolute reality.
• 37:50
  Yeah, all incompetent or not. Well, I would like to talk to
• 37:54
  the people coming in. I don't.
• 37:56
  I don't know why we have to kick.
• 37:58
  People out. I'm giving you very circumspect,
• 38:01
  truncated questions and I'm getting a monologue and you're
• 38:04
  not giving me clear cut specific answers.
• 38:07
  OK, now when you say absolute reality, yes.
• 38:11
  Is absolute reality everything that is?
• 38:15
  Or is there something that lies? In existence, with independence
• 38:18
  from absolute reality, it is the one thing that is real, that is
• 38:23
  the entirety of anything that is.
• 38:27
  OK. Is that is when you say it is
• 38:29
  the one thing, is that a concrete one or an abstract one?
• 38:33
  Concrete conceptualizes a set of because the the problem is, the
• 38:37
  problem is the problem is no, no, no, no, no.
• 38:40
  Just let me speak for a second. The problem is that if it's a
• 38:43
  set, it's an abstraction. You keep saying, is it concrete
• 38:46
  or abstract? And it's like, well, if it's
• 38:49
  reality and it's an abstraction, then it's not real.
• 38:53
  And then you've sort of put yourself in a position where
• 38:55
  you're saying that that reality. The term is an abstraction.
• 38:59
  An abstraction. A single term that is an
• 39:03
  abstraction can quantify 2 or more concrete things.
• 39:07
  It's not that the two or more things are abstractions
• 39:09
  themselves. Now when you talk about reality
• 39:13
  as being one, you are either invoking that as a concrete one
• 39:17
  or an abstract one. Where the abstract 1.
• 39:21
  Collectivizes 2 or more concrete things.
• 39:23
  So which is it? Well, the problem here is that I
• 39:27
  can say that my body is one thing.
• 39:30
  The problem is it's made-up of cells that are also one thing.
• 39:33
  Can you please answer? There's other things that are
• 39:35
  just, yeah, I'm addressing. I'm addressing what you're
• 39:37
  saying and sort of so when you're saying that there's
• 39:42
  nothing that prevents a reality and an absolute reality of being
• 39:48
  one thing, whereas we are parts of that thing, just so you're.
• 39:52
  Not directly answering my question, I am.
• 39:55
  It's like you're like you're giving me a Community College
• 39:58
  lecture. I'm not trying to be rude, I'm.
• 40:00
  Just explaining how you're. Wrong.
• 40:01
  I know when somebody is filibustering me, OK, well, no,
• 40:04
  I'm just explaining how you're. Wrong.
• 40:06
  What I want to know from you is simply this OK when you when you
• 40:10
  tell me what is ultimate? Is it 1 concrete thing?
• 40:15
  Yes. Or is it one thing where it is
• 40:18
  an abstraction that collect devices two or more concrete
• 40:22
  things? It's either one of the other
• 40:24
  things so you see what it is. This will be the last time I'll
• 40:26
  explain this cuz I've already been through it multiple times
• 40:29
  and I'm kind of getting. No, you've been giving me mumbo
• 40:31
  jumbo Mark. No, I haven't.
• 40:33
  You haven't been listening. So my perception, my perception
• 40:38
  of of reality is, is a apparent because my senses can be wrong.
• 40:44
  But I believe that there is one thing which is an absolute
• 40:49
  reality that we are all a part of and connected, that we're not
• 40:54
  individuals. That in essence we are all just
• 40:57
  one and part of the massive, everything absolute reality that
• 41:04
  exists. Our apparent, our apparent
• 41:07
  reality says that we are, we are separate people.
• 41:12
  But when? Not you're in, you're in this
• 41:13
  tunnel. Mission vote OK, like like like
• 41:16
  you're autistic. OK, what was the question?
• 41:18
  I am autistic. Is that a problem?
• 41:21
  No. Yeah, it is a problem because
• 41:23
  you're not focusing on my question.
• 41:25
  What was the question that I asked you, Mark?
• 41:28
  You said is the absolute reality a concrete or is?
• 41:34
  It I didn't use that term. No, I did not.
• 41:36
  That's your term. I didn't use that term at all.
• 41:38
  OK. What terms did you?
• 41:39
  Even remember the questions I asked you?
• 41:42
  Well, I mean, I I I get the gist of them, Yeah.
• 41:45
  I mean The thing is repeat. Back to me what my question was
• 41:48
  to you. Yeah, so I thought you said is
• 41:51
  absolute reality one concrete thing, or is it an abstraction
• 41:58
  that is a set of things that are real and that's paraphrasing
• 42:04
  concrete? Particular, it's either one or
• 42:06
  the other. There's not a third.
• 42:08
  Yeah. And I've answered it like five
• 42:09
  times. Which is it, Mark?
• 42:15
  Yeah, I've answered it five times.
• 42:17
  Asked and answered. It no, it's not clear.
• 42:19
  It's not clear you gave me. You were very.
• 42:21
  I don't think that's gonna be more clear.
• 42:22
  That that was not your. It's one absolute reality is 1
• 42:27
  concrete. Thing Do you know?
• 42:30
  Do you know how to interact with people instead of lecturing like
• 42:34
  you're my 5th grade teacher? Well, if you don't want the
• 42:36
  answers, don't ask the questions.
• 42:38
  I mean, you're asking for questions and I'm answering you.
• 42:41
  I don't know what the problem. Is Mark.
• 42:42
  Mark, you're filibustering me. Listen, what do you mean?
• 42:45
  I gave you an either or question that leaves no room for sure or
• 42:50
  possibility and I answered. It now is the question clear to
• 42:54
  you? Yes.
• 42:56
  Okay. So which is it?
• 42:58
  Is reality a concrete one? Or is reality one in that it
• 43:04
  abstracts the collectivizing of two or more Concrete, particular
• 43:11
  absolute reality is a concrete one.
• 43:15
  OK, here's the problem that you have now.
• 43:18
  OK, then you're going to have to tell me what that is.
• 43:24
  What is it? Absolute reality.
• 43:28
  Is absolute reality. Everything.
• 43:31
  Yes. OK, so then everything real.
• 43:35
  The sum total of everything. The sum total of everything that
• 43:39
  is concretely real is just one concrete thing, so that there
• 43:44
  are no discrete 2 or more concrete particulars.
• 43:48
  Now you've got it. You caught on.
• 43:50
  There you go. OK, so here's the problem then.
• 43:53
  OK, so you are a monist. So what you're telling me is
• 43:57
  everything is what is ultimate? And that ultimate is a concrete
• 44:02
  one, as opposed to an abstract one of two or more discrete
• 44:07
  concrete particulars. Now can you please explain to me
• 44:11
  and tell me how you can predicate, how you can invoke
• 44:16
  distinctions that are not real? Because in order to make actual
• 44:21
  distinctions as opposed to the distinctions are abstract.
• 44:25
  Okay, Then there have to be two or more.
• 44:29
  Concrete, discrete things. But in your view, there's only
• 44:34
  one concrete thing. There are not two or more
• 44:37
  concrete discrete particulars. OK, so let's make let me make
• 44:42
  this clear to you. That would be.
• 44:44
  Correct. OK are do you reject?
• 44:48
  And I don't need a lecture. All I need to know is, do you
• 44:50
  reject that there are two or more discrete concrete
• 44:56
  particulars? Do I reject that there are two
• 45:00
  or more concrete particulars? Discrete concrete particulars.
• 45:05
  Discrete concrete. Let me get this down to discrete
• 45:07
  concrete particulars in absolute reality, yes.
• 45:13
  Okay. Well, you've now contradicted
• 45:14
  yourself, Okay, because a minute ago you told me that reality,
• 45:19
  the sum total of all real things, was a concrete one.
• 45:23
  Now you're telling me that within reality there are two or
• 45:26
  more discrete concrete particulars.
• 45:29
  That's a contradiction. You just said, do you reject?
• 45:34
  OK, what? You said, do you reject that
• 45:38
  there are two or more discrete concrete particulars?
• 45:42
  And I said yes, as in I reject that In absolute reality, yes.
• 45:47
  So. So that's your wording.
• 45:49
  Now do you understand now? But you no longer have the
• 45:53
  ability, since you believe that there is only one concrete
• 45:56
  thing. That when you when you start
• 45:59
  talking and you are invoking actual distinctions, okay the
• 46:03
  distinctions being discrete. Things don't exist because for
• 46:08
  you there's only one concrete thing and no two or more
• 46:12
  concrete particulars. Sure they understand the
• 46:15
  problem. Sure they exist.
• 46:17
  So when you say exist, they are abstractions of the set of all
• 46:22
  real things that exist in the in the apparent reality that I
• 46:29
  operate in because I don't operate in.
• 46:31
  Mark, we're not talking. I don't operate in.
• 46:34
  What we're talking about are concrete things.
• 46:36
  No, no, no. I'm only in apparent reality.
• 46:39
  Hey, Mark, Do. You see how focused I am?
• 46:41
  OK, now is it your position that only one?
• 46:47
  Concrete thing exists and that there are not two or more
• 46:52
  discrete concrete particulars. So that your position.
• 46:56
  What I don't get, What I don't get is what this has to do with
• 47:00
  me believing in a God. It seems like such a non
• 47:03
  sequitur, it seems like a runaround.
• 47:05
  To instantiate, what is it that is indeed ultimate as a defeat?
• 47:10
  I've told you now. You seem to be, and this is not
• 47:15
  disrespectful. You seem to be utterly confused
• 47:19
  about the difference between. The set of all real things,
• 47:22
  reality being a concrete one, reverses.
• 47:25
  Reality is consists of two or more concrete particulars.
• 47:28
  Now since you told me that you believe in that reality, which
• 47:33
  is the set of all real things, simply subsists at 1:00 and 1:00
• 47:38
  alone. Concrete.
• 47:39
  Particular? Sure.
• 47:40
  Then I got a foundation. So there are no.
• 47:44
  Is it your view There are no two or more discrete concrete
• 47:48
  particulars. There is in my apparent reality
• 47:50
  we we carve it up to make it. So the problem here is that
• 47:54
  you're sort of you're blending in epistemology.
• 47:58
  Straight ontology I have. The Do you hear me?
• 48:02
  I have the. Do you?
• 48:03
  Hear that? I'm agitated, Mark.
• 48:05
  Yeah, I don't know why, Because you seem to have this.
• 48:09
  You seem to have this thing of the only answer that you will
• 48:12
  accept is a God Mark. You're feeling that?
• 48:16
  The problem with that is I do have these beliefs on what life
• 48:21
  is. Can you tell me?
• 48:23
  Get away with this. Can you tell me?
• 48:26
  Look, you've been asking me tons of questions.
• 48:28
  Can you tell me why? How you know that God is your
• 48:33
  ultimate foundation? I'll be glad to.
• 48:35
  I'll be glad to get that. I'll be glad to get that.
• 48:38
  I don't think it. Will be.
• 48:39
  I'll be glad to do it. You've asked me like 50
• 48:42
  questions and now like I can't ask one back more.
• 48:47
  Happy to acquiesce to your request.
• 48:49
  I don't think you would be filibustering.
• 48:51
  Me, OK Or nobody's filibustering you.
• 48:55
  Nobody's, nobody's doing anything.
• 48:58
  Thousands of people, yeah. And they all say this about you,
• 49:02
  you see? You see, you don't even want to
• 49:04
  have an interaction. You want to just sit there and
• 49:05
  go blah blah, blah blah, blah, blah blah blah.
• 49:08
  Oh really? Me?
• 49:10
  That's ironic, Yeah, Mark. Keep on asking you simple,
• 49:15
  truncated questions and you launch off into this monologue.
• 49:20
  Okay. Now, I'm not asking you for a
• 49:22
  monologue. I'm not asking you for to give
• 49:24
  me a soliloquy about your worldview.
• 49:27
  I'm asking you very simple, trust truncated questions.
• 49:30
  Now, do you reject the notion that there are two or more
• 49:37
  discrete? Separate concrete things.
• 49:42
  Do you reject that provisionally?
• 49:49
  Yeah, okay. Sure.
• 49:53
  The problem with that is you then forfeit your ability to
• 49:59
  invoke distinctions. Well, I can't claim to know that
• 50:03
  for sure. Finish please.
• 50:04
  Well, not really. This is this is sort of leading
• 50:08
  me down a certain script that I really think.
• 50:11
  Is I brought up the I brought up the term autism before.
• 50:14
  OK, you seem to have a lack of give and play in the
• 50:17
  conversation. I have been working hard trying
• 50:20
  to give, give and play to you. So it seems to me that you just
• 50:23
  want to monologue and lecture me.
• 50:25
  Why you gaslighting? Old man, I wasn't born
• 50:28
  yesterday. Why you gaslighting me?
• 50:30
  I'm trying to have a civil conversation and you're
• 50:33
  gaslighting me into blaming me. Is this how it's going to be,
• 50:37
  Mark? Is this how it's going to be?
• 50:38
  Well, I think it's how it has to be because you will not engage
• 50:42
  with a discussion where both people ask each other questions
• 50:47
  and discuss their worldviews. So you don't.
• 50:50
  You are doing an interrogation where you have answers that you
• 50:54
  want and you are asking the questions in order to get
• 50:58
  specific answers out of them. So that I think you are actually
• 51:05
  you you basically. You are so obtuse.
• 51:07
  You are so self unaware. It it it is staggering to me.
• 51:11
  OK, I'm asking you very simple truncated questions and you're
• 51:15
  giving me this meandering monologue.
• 51:17
  I don't want a meandering monologue.
• 51:19
  What I want to know if you use this, if you believe that
• 51:21
  there's only one concrete thing, you forfeit the ability to speak
• 51:27
  of real distinctions. There's.
• 51:29
  Only one concrete things. Let me explain to you why.
• 51:32
  OK, no, let me explain you why. Yep.
• 51:36
  It's because it's because I can use the set of real.
• 51:41
  So if I could just explain. If I could just explain, I can
• 51:44
  use apparent reality to make the set of things parts of that one
• 51:51
  and the individual. Parts just as a human body.
• 51:54
  Can I finish, Please can I finish or you're just going to
• 51:56
  talk over the top of me? Don't.
• 51:58
  You hear the frustration in my voice, Mark.
• 52:01
  Well, you're not allowing me to explain.
• 52:03
  No, you're being uncooperative. Mark what with your script.
• 52:07
  No, no with my with your script. Now like what is this one?
• 52:12
  What is this one that you call? Obviously.
• 52:15
  Obviously I know who you are and I don't know why you do this.
• 52:19
  You. Leave this one, this ultimate
• 52:21
  mark. Tell me what that is so I can
• 52:24
  make distinctions between the parts of the Ultimate One by
• 52:28
  using our apparent reality to separate things into parts, just
• 52:34
  like my body has one thing and what is the?
• 52:38
  Unifier Mark. What is the ultimate unifier?
• 52:41
  What is the ultimate unifier of what, right?
• 52:46
  Yeah, if you say, if you say that the ultimate is the one in
• 52:50
  the many okay either, you're gonna say the ultimate is a
• 52:53
  concrete one, You'll say it's a concrete many.
• 52:55
  Nobody solved the one in the many problem.
• 52:58
  Nobody solved that problem. You haven't solved that problem.
• 53:01
  Okay. Now, Mark.
• 53:02
  Mark, listen carefully. You haven't solved that problem.
• 53:05
  It's the ultimate wow. So what is the answer to the one
• 53:09
  in the many problem? Is the problem is listen to me
• 53:12
  your problem? What's my problem?
• 53:13
  It's. Not that you lack intelligence.
• 53:15
  Your problem is not that you don't have the gift of the gab.
• 53:17
  You're well spoken, okay. Your problem is you're not
• 53:21
  focusing at the question at hand and you're using the question
• 53:25
  that I. Give to you.
• 53:27
  It's an opportunity to meander into a monologue Now.
• 53:31
  OK, I want so just to give you some feedback, just to give.
• 53:34
  It does. Wait a second.
• 53:35
  No, no, wait a second. Wait a second.
• 53:38
  I want to give you feedback as well because you gave feedback
• 53:41
  for me. I think you're very highly
• 53:43
  intelligent and you are well spoken, but I must say you're
• 53:46
  incredibly aggressive and I do feel like you're not interested
• 53:51
  in my actual answers, you're interested in the answers that
• 53:54
  you you want. No that.
• 53:56
  That is a false characterization.
• 53:58
  But I will be aggressive when somebody is giving me a Miranda,
• 54:02
  a meandering monologue, which is what I believe that you're that
• 54:06
  you're doing. It's like, it's like, it's like
• 54:08
  I'm your college student in a Community College lecture and
• 54:10
  you're going on and on and on and on and on.
• 54:13
  So now that the problem is that the questions were complex.
• 54:17
  The questions were complex. I'm a dog with a bone, Mark.
• 54:21
  I'm going to tell you, I don't care.
• 54:23
  I don't care. I don't.
• 54:24
  Care. Parents don't care.
• 54:25
  Well then, what's the problem? When?
• 54:26
  You say that there's an ultimate.
• 54:28
  Is is the ultimate a concrete one?
• 54:33
  Is it a concrete many? Or is the ultimate a concrete
• 54:37
  one and many? I've already answered that, but
• 54:40
  I would like to ask you what is the answer for the one and the
• 54:42
  many problem? How do you have one thing
• 54:45
  made-up of other things that are one, And how do you solve that
• 54:49
  problem? Christian worldview where the
• 54:51
  Triume God. Is oneness, and as manyness
• 54:55
  possessed equal ultimacy? Now I answered that question.
• 54:58
  Now what I want to know from something the one and many at
• 55:02
  the same. You don't learn anything.
• 55:03
  I am a dog with a bone. No, that doesn't solve the one
• 55:06
  and many problems now, Mark. Is you're you're claiming at the
• 55:11
  moment. You're claiming at the moment
• 55:13
  for something to be one and three at the same time.
• 55:18
  With your reference to the triangle, how can something be
• 55:22
  one and three at the same time? Mark, do you understand?
• 55:28
  You brought up the one and the many problem, and I don't have
• 55:30
  an answer for that, but neither do you.
• 55:33
  OK. So, so OK.
• 55:34
  So, in other words, you don't know.
• 55:37
  Whether the ultimate is characterized as a concrete one
• 55:42
  or a concrete money or, I've already answered this.
• 55:45
  I've already answered this as. Clearly I want to know which is
• 55:48
  it I've already answered. One of the three or I don't
• 55:50
  know. Yeah, no, I've already answered
• 55:52
  it. I'm not going over this again.
• 55:53
  You're just going to have to be satisfied with your answer.
• 55:56
  Though so the problem is that you have a God that you're
• 56:00
  claiming is 1 and is 3. Now, to my mind, that is
• 56:05
  completely I've already answered.
• 56:07
  But I'm not answering it anymore.
• 56:09
  I've already answered it. I'm not answering it anymore.
• 56:12
  No, you're going over the same question again and again and
• 56:15
  again and I've already answered it.
• 56:18
  No, I I don't. I'm not.
• 56:19
  I'm. I'm just sick of answering the
• 56:21
  same question over and over. No, no, I'm not answering it
• 56:24
  anymore. I'm not.
• 56:26
  I'm not answering it anymore. I'm not answering.
• 56:29
  It so how can something be one and three at the same time?
• 56:35
  No, I'm asking you a question. I'm asking you a question.
• 56:39
  How can something be one and three at the same time?
• 56:45
  Is is something that is 1/3? Yeah, a cube.
• 56:50
  A cube is one thing, and it has three, a three fold
• 56:53
  distinctions. So it's it's three things.
• 56:57
  One cube is 3 things is what you're saying?
• 56:59
  No, It is something, something, something can be unified.
• 57:05
  And also possessed within its unity diversity.
• 57:09
  Yes, I agree. But how can one cube have three
• 57:13
  things? And how can one cube is a cube
• 57:16
  one thing is a cube one thing. I'm gonna.
• 57:20
  Drop. I'm gonna drop everything that's
• 57:22
  gone is a cube. One thing.
• 57:25
  How do you? Know is a cube one thing.
• 57:29
  Ultimate is a cube. One thing aren't.
• 57:32
  You. Aren't you getting a queue here?
• 57:34
  I'm not paying attention to any of your Is a cube one thing?
• 57:42
  I'm a no no. So a cube isn't one thing.
• 57:46
  A cube isn't one thing. Is a cube three things?
• 57:51
  Mark, Mark, I'm ignoring you right now because you're
• 57:54
  ignoring me. Well, I I'm sick of you asking
• 57:57
  the same question over and over, so I'm not going to answer it
• 58:00
  anymore. You refused to answer the
• 58:01
  question. No, no, no.
• 58:02
  You refused to accept the answer.
• 58:04
  We're. Going back to the initial
• 58:05
  question of your atheist no, I don't think we are.
• 58:08
  I don't think we are. No in order for you.
• 58:10
  No. No, You don't get to tell me
• 58:14
  that. Why arts are You're just not
• 58:16
  going to accept. You're not.
• 58:18
  You're not. I can do this all day too.
• 58:20
  I'm very, yeah, very. I mean it's only like.
• 58:23
  Like yourself that had the gift of gab and filibustering.
• 58:25
  Yeah, it's only I can do this 1:00 here.
• 58:27
  I can. I can stay up.
• 58:29
  Yeah. Mark.
• 58:30
  I can do this all day too. I'm a big point, OK?
• 58:34
  I'm 61 years old. I'm well acquainted with people
• 58:37
  who employ the kind of teacher that you're like it.
• 58:39
  Unfortunately, that's that's the problem.
• 58:42
  OK. No, you know, I asked the.
• 58:44
  Question. I'm aggressive.
• 58:45
  I'm aggressive when people are entirely evasive, such as you.
• 58:49
  Now I want actually you're kind of manipulative and just sort
• 58:53
  of, can you tell me I've given you the answer tell.
• 58:56
  Me. Yeah.
• 58:57
  OK, Mark, listen to me. I guess I keep on communicating
• 59:01
  over and over again. I'm a dog with them, OK?
• 59:04
  Yeah. I don't.
• 59:04
  Can you tell me? I don't.
• 59:07
  I don't care. What what about you being a dog
• 59:09
  with a bone? I don't care about, like, just
• 59:12
  because you want a bone. Like, let's look at this.
• 59:16
  Hang on. No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
• 59:18
  Let's look at this. You're a dog that wants a bone,
• 59:20
  a certain answer to a question, and you will not accept a dog
• 59:25
  treat or or any other answer than the answer that you want.
• 59:30
  And so if you're not going to accept my answer, then why
• 59:35
  should I provide you an answer answer at all?
• 59:38
  If you won't accept it, well, I mean, I don't really care.
• 59:43
  I don't really care. I mean, you're I've given the
• 59:46
  answer again and again and again and you've basically gone back
• 59:50
  to the same question again and again and I'm sick of giving the
• 59:53
  answer. I'm not doubting anything.
• 59:56
  I've been in here for ages answering.
• 59:58
  Me very simply Okay. I asked truncated questions, But
• 1:00:01
  you wanna give me a Community College?
• 1:00:04
  They're quite complex questions. Actually they're quite complex,
• 1:00:08
  so. What means do you establish
• 1:00:12
  that? Which is ultimate?
• 1:00:14
  By what means do I establish what is altered?
• 1:00:18
  I think how do you demonstrate? Yes.
• 1:00:20
  So I I think the only thing that you can rationally justify, and
• 1:00:25
  I gave the justification before, I'm not sure if you did hear it
• 1:00:28
  or not. I can go over it again.
• 1:00:30
  Was that an absolute? College Lecture Yeah, I was just
• 1:00:35
  about to get there. That an absolute reality must
• 1:00:39
  exist. It must.
• 1:00:42
  Well, well, Sir, we're not talking about.
• 1:00:45
  Absolutely. You can call me Mark.
• 1:00:46
  You don't have to call me Sir. Call me Mark.
• 1:00:48
  See, this is your problem. What?
• 1:00:51
  You have a touch of autism? Okay, you're in.
• 1:00:54
  No, I don't have a touch. I don't have a touch.
• 1:00:57
  I'm pretty. On the spectrum, why don't you
• 1:01:00
  listen for a moment? Well, I am listening.
• 1:01:03
  I just. I.
• 1:01:04
  Am getting from you and I'm not getting straightforward answers.
• 1:01:07
  I'm getting Community College. Soliloquies.
• 1:01:11
  And that was interesting. Community College monologues.
• 1:01:13
  Now listen to me carefully. Okay.
• 1:01:16
  What is ultimate? By what means?
• 1:01:20
  Yes. Is it through pure reason?
• 1:01:22
  Yes. Is it through induction or
• 1:01:24
  deduction? Pure reason.
• 1:01:27
  Okay okay. There's deduction now.
• 1:01:30
  We've got a straightforward here.
• 1:01:31
  Now here's the problem. Your mind.
• 1:01:36
  Which is your mind? Which is operating through
• 1:01:39
  reason? Your mind and your mind alone
• 1:01:44
  can demonstrate that which is ultimate.
• 1:01:48
  Well, I can demonstrate it to you too.
• 1:01:52
  Okay. Can you tell me, do you want me
• 1:01:54
  to demonstrate it to you? Listen, listen carefully Mark.
• 1:01:58
  I've had this debate hundreds of Times Now by your.
• 1:02:02
  Reason alone listen to me. By pure reason alone, can you
• 1:02:08
  tell me why, at the most fundamental level, why the moon
• 1:02:15
  exists? By pure reason alone, No.
• 1:02:19
  Why would I use pure reason? Contradicting yourself?
• 1:02:23
  No, I haven't. What are you talking about?
• 1:02:25
  Would you like me to explain? Not really.
• 1:02:32
  That by pure reason, through your cognitive processes, yes,
• 1:02:38
  you can demonstrate what is ultimate and what is ultimate is
• 1:02:42
  not. I mean, I can take you through
• 1:02:29
  the thing again. You told?
• 1:02:43
  Really. Or what is the moon is an
• 1:02:44
  ultimate? Carefully, the moon is an
• 1:02:47
  ultimate I'm. Really getting I'm really
• 1:02:49
  getting increasingly attitude shading.
• 1:02:51
  Sounds like a you problem. You're just touching Okay.
• 1:02:54
  Sounds like a you. Problem.
• 1:02:56
  Yeah, Mark. Mark, I don't.
• 1:02:58
  I just let me. Make this clear to you, Mark.
• 1:03:02
  I don't know what that's supposed to mean, if that's.
• 1:03:05
  Obvious here why I want to fill you in on something that's so
• 1:03:08
  you said that that. No, just let me answer.
• 1:03:11
  You said that I cannot demonstrate the moon by pure
• 1:03:14
  reason, but the moon is not what is, ultimately.
• 1:03:19
  Understand that when you when you give me these mirandering
• 1:03:23
  soliloquies, I completely tune you out.
• 1:03:27
  It was like 2 sentences. It was 2 sentences.
• 1:03:31
  Are you saying you can't follow two sentences?
• 1:03:34
  Mark, Mark, listen again. I'm a dog with a bone.
• 1:03:38
  I don't care. I filibustering.
• 1:03:40
  I don't care what you want out of me.
• 1:03:43
  I will give the answers that I choose to answer with, not what
• 1:03:47
  you want. That's.
• 1:03:48
  Right. You better accept that.
• 1:03:51
  I'm going to choose to respond to you and point out to you that
• 1:03:54
  you're filibustering. Well, I'm not.
• 1:03:57
  You said that I cannot demonstrate the moon through
• 1:04:01
  pure reason, and I agreed. And then you said well and and,
• 1:04:05
  but but the moon isn't what is ultimate.
• 1:04:08
  And I never said that the moon is ultimate.
• 1:04:10
  I said I could demonstrate what is ultimate through pure reason.
• 1:04:14
  Not the moon. You.
• 1:04:15
  Hold on a second. You never said at all.
• 1:04:18
  During the entire interaction that you had with me, you never
• 1:04:22
  identified what was ultimate. I did.
• 1:04:26
  I did. Okay.
• 1:04:26
  What is it? What is it that is ultimate,
• 1:04:29
  absolute reality? I've said this again and again
• 1:04:32
  and again. You lack a broken record.
• 1:04:35
  It's. Crazy reality.
• 1:04:37
  Now here's the problem. Yeah, you don't need to add the
• 1:04:40
  qualifier of absolute. All you have to do is say
• 1:04:43
  reality. Okay, I do.
• 1:04:46
  Unnecessary qualifier? No, I do.
• 1:04:51
  Okay, so absolute do you. When you say absolute, do you
• 1:04:54
  mean unconditionally non dependent and self-contained?
• 1:04:58
  Yes. Okay.
• 1:05:01
  So I will take that as a given. So we can simplify this by you
• 1:05:06
  saying what is ultimate is reality.
• 1:05:10
  Is that your position? Well, I mean, I make a
• 1:05:14
  distinction between my apparent reality that I interact with and
• 1:05:18
  an ultimate reality. This is your problem.
• 1:05:20
  Mark, this is your problem. Well, we're gonna have to accept
• 1:05:23
  that, because that's my answer and you.
• 1:05:25
  Want to go into these many little monologues now?
• 1:05:29
  Is reality that you have invoked?
• 1:05:33
  Is that what is ultimate? Yes.
• 1:05:39
  OK now. Can you please?
• 1:05:42
  So is reality everything? Yes.
• 1:05:50
  Okay. How did you determine that
• 1:05:52
  everything is ultimate? How did I determine that
• 1:05:58
  everything is ultimate? Because it is the base level
• 1:06:05
  that I can I know must exist through to the pure reason.
• 1:06:10
  That's totally. How do you determine that?
• 1:06:15
  How did you determine that everything now does everything
• 1:06:19
  include? Two or more concrete
• 1:06:21
  particulars. OK, so I don't make any claims
• 1:06:26
  on what everything is or the limits of everything.
• 1:06:30
  I make no claims on that whatsoever.
• 1:06:32
  I just know that. I asked you a straightforward
• 1:06:36
  question and you're answering a semi related question.
• 1:06:39
  This is what you have been doing the whole time and that's why
• 1:06:41
  you're you're you're finding out that I'm aggressive.
• 1:06:44
  I get aggressive when people start meandering and answering
• 1:06:47
  Semi related question I didn't ask, now is reality.
• 1:06:50
  T2 or more concrete things? Has there ever been a discussion
• 1:06:54
  that you've had that you haven't gotten aggressive because people
• 1:06:57
  haven't given you the answers? That they that you want because
• 1:07:00
  I'm dealing when I don't get a I don't get aggressive.
• 1:07:03
  Yeah, people are not purposely monologuing and filibustering,
• 1:07:08
  so it seems. Like agitated when people are
• 1:07:10
  monologuing and filibuster? Well, it seems like to me you
• 1:07:13
  get angry when you don't get the answers that you.
• 1:07:16
  Want no. So you want certain answers out
• 1:07:19
  of me and you're not going to get?
• 1:07:22
  Agitated when someone like yourself thinks you're pulling
• 1:07:25
  the wool over my eyes, Nobody is pulling the wool over your eyes.
• 1:07:29
  Nobody is you. Typically what you atheists do,
• 1:07:32
  you bicker. Bicker.
• 1:07:34
  Well, that's just an ad hominem. How can you, How were you able
• 1:07:38
  to demonstrate that, which is ultimate?
• 1:07:41
  How did you how did you demonstrate that?
• 1:07:43
  How did you demonstrate what is Ultimate OK?
• 1:07:46
  I'm awaiting your answer. No, no, no.
• 1:07:47
  I'm asking you, how did you demonstrate what's ultimate?
• 1:07:51
  Mark, Mark, I'll answer after you do.
• 1:07:54
  I'll answer after you do. I will answer after you do, Sir.
• 1:08:00
  I will answer after you do. I will be more than happy.
• 1:08:04
  I don't. Think you're happy to have you
• 1:08:06
  pepper me with questions about my worldview, which never
• 1:08:10
  happens to you? About your atheism.
• 1:08:13
  That's what this conversation is about right now.
• 1:08:16
  And when you start talking to be a my about my worldview, this is
• 1:08:19
  a bait and switch. Now, how did you demonstrate
• 1:08:22
  this? This, this conversation wasn't
• 1:08:25
  about atheism. I was talking to the lovely
• 1:08:28
  people. Praise and and and.
• 1:08:30
  No, no, no, no, no, no. Let me finish.
• 1:08:32
  Let me finish. I was talking to them about
• 1:08:35
  Christianity, how you you knew that you're a Christian and
• 1:08:39
  their interpretation of of scripture upon me.
• 1:08:43
  Then you came into the room and decided you wanted to make it
• 1:08:47
  about something else. Now don't sort of pretend this
• 1:08:50
  isn't what happened and what happens every single time you
• 1:08:53
  step into a room. I mean, come on, let's be real
• 1:08:56
  here. OK.
• 1:08:58
  Mark, did you agree? To Why did you not initially
• 1:09:04
  refuse to answer questions about your atheism, but now you are?
• 1:09:08
  I'm not refusing. I I just don't want to repeat
• 1:09:11
  the same answers over and over and over, ad nauseam, because
• 1:09:15
  you're just looking for the answers that you want.
• 1:09:18
  Like you said, you're a dog after a bone and a bone that the
• 1:09:21
  answer you want is the only answer that you will accept.
• 1:09:24
  I keep explaining to you what my basis is, and you keep saying
• 1:09:31
  no, that I need a different answer.
• 1:09:33
  I'm a dog with a bone. Yeah, I really do believe you
• 1:09:35
  are. You're after one thing and one
• 1:09:37
  thing alone, and it kind of shows.
• 1:09:40
  Mate, you really need to have a think about whether you want to
• 1:09:43
  accept answers from people. Why do you even ask if you're
• 1:09:47
  only after one answer, why don't you just assume they're going to
• 1:09:50
  answer that way? It's kind of weird.
• 1:09:53
  It's very weird. Well, there, ladies and
• 1:10:17
  gentlemen, I'll just get my camera back up.
• 1:10:26
  So that was my. Oh, that was my first
• 1:10:31
  interaction with Darth. I hope I did OK.
• 1:10:35
  I kind of, you know, I might not have.
• 1:10:38
  I'm a dabbler in philosophy. I'm not a full on, you know
• 1:10:42
  person. But interesting that I got
• 1:10:44
  kicked, you know like interesting that I got kicked.
• 1:10:48
  I I really don't think he likes, he doesn't like answering
• 1:10:55
  questions. He just wants to grill people.
• 1:10:58
  It's kind of terrible. That was good.
• 1:11:01
  I I I thought I did really well. I I don't know I've got the gift
• 1:11:06
  of the gab. I'm just you know I'm just sorry
• 1:11:13
  My bad. I I just, yeah, we'll listen a
• 1:11:22
  bit. A DD teenager then, with that
• 1:11:24
  guy. What a train wreck that guy was.
• 1:11:31
  I didn't hear what you said. I was gonna say.
• 1:11:34
  What are you hoping to accomplish with him?
• 1:11:35
  I'm sure you've seen him before, right?
• 1:11:38
  No, I'd never seen him before. OK, Well, I guess then that was
• 1:11:42
  a new for you, new conversation with Mark.
• 1:11:44
  Yeah, I mean, Mark's a pretty. Subtle, predictable atheist.
• 1:11:47
  Well, what you see, what I saw there with Mark?
• 1:11:51
  Was the typical atheist strategy of filibustering, dodging while
• 1:11:55
  pretending to answer the question and then just rambling
• 1:11:58
  and and make meandering. And then when you point out that
• 1:12:01
  they're meandering and not really answering the question,
• 1:12:03
  then they say, Oh yes, I did answer the question you just
• 1:12:06
  don't like. I mean he his, his.
• 1:12:10
  He made numerous statements where he contradicted himself.
• 1:12:13
  So on the one hand, he wants to tell me that the ultimate is is
• 1:12:18
  a concrete one. But it also subsists of a
• 1:12:21
  concrete many. We all heard him say that.
• 1:12:24
  Does everybody remember when he said that?
• 1:12:29
  Can I get some feedback here? Yes.
• 1:12:33
  Okay. We all heard him say that what
• 1:12:36
  is ultimate is a concrete one, but it also is a concrete many,
• 1:12:42
  right? But then.
• 1:12:44
  Shortly thereafter, he says nobody has solved the one in the
• 1:12:47
  many problem. But when you say that ultimate
• 1:12:51
  reality is a concrete one, but it also possesses diversity and
• 1:12:56
  distinctions. OK, that they composed of
• 1:12:59
  concrete Many. OK, then you have solved the one
• 1:13:03
  in the many problem. The guy is a walking
• 1:13:05
  contradiction and what he does. Is he just keeps on going, blah
• 1:13:10
  blah blah blah blah until you're blue in the face.
• 1:13:14
  But you see I don't put up with that And then he wants to go,
• 1:13:17
  well, you're really aggressive. You're damn right I'm aggressive
• 1:13:20
  when you're just sitting there monologuing and you're not
• 1:13:23
  having a conversation with me. You you're talking to me like
• 1:13:27
  I'm some 9th or 10th grader and you're a Community College
• 1:13:30
  professor and you're fooling me with all of this this, this,
• 1:13:33
  this filibustering, this, this me, this monologue.
• 1:13:37
  Meandering. Right.
• 1:13:39
  So he wants to tell me that God doesn't exist because what is
• 1:13:44
  ultimate is is absolute reality. Well, by what means that he
• 1:13:48
  determined that by pure reason. So in other words, he's
• 1:13:51
  determined that God doesn't exist by pure reason.
• 1:13:55
  So his mind is able to determine that God doesn't exist based
• 1:13:58
  upon what? Right.
• 1:14:01
  What is ultimate? What is ultimate?
• 1:14:03
  OK? And then when he says is
• 1:14:05
  ultimate, well, everything is ultimate OK?
• 1:14:06
  How did you determine that? By pure reason.
• 1:14:10
  And then he launches off into another meandering Community
• 1:14:13
  College lecture. How did you determine what
• 1:14:17
  ultimate? Right.
• 1:14:19
  Absolute reality. That's just a throwaway term.
• 1:14:22
  It's a buzzword like that doesn't have any.
• 1:14:25
  Meaning or justification behind it, so you also can demonstrate
• 1:14:30
  how absolute reality was necessary.
• 1:14:32
  He needs to demonstrate that as well.
• 1:14:34
  He didn't do that. No, look, this is this is what
• 1:14:38
  he and This is why I brought up the issue of autism.
• 1:14:40
  And I'm not trying to be mean or throw anybody under the bus.
• 1:14:44
  But he, he, he shows this capacity of just ignoring that
• 1:14:49
  somebody is upset with them, that look, you're just lecturing
• 1:14:53
  me. You're not getting down to the
• 1:14:55
  meat and potatoes of my question because you're talking to me
• 1:14:59
  like I'm a freshman in some. Actually in any college class
• 1:15:03
  I've got to say that the the people in in praises chat are
• 1:15:06
  actually really nice about it and they apologized and you
• 1:15:10
  know, so you know this is that for you.
• 1:15:17
  I mean, I I know I've got some pretty unconventional views and
• 1:15:22
  I am on the autism spectrum. This is true and and and I'm not
• 1:15:25
  going to be ashamed of that and I'm not going to hideaway and
• 1:15:31
  and pretend that I'm not. I'm going to be proud of who I
• 1:15:35
  am. And I think I did a good job.
• 1:15:37
  I think I did. And I'll, I'll send it into Tom
• 1:15:40
  Rabbit's show and hopefully I'll get a free T-shirt.
• 1:15:43
  But yeah, do you have a good day?
• 1:15:50
  And yeah, I'll see you next time you know, wants to boot me.
• 1:15:56
  But I I really was interested in talking to Sparrow, Olive and
• 1:15:59
  Praise about why they think that God has talked to me.
• 1:16:05
  I've heard, but then the devil has taken that away kind of
• 1:16:09
  thing. I thought that was fascinating.
• 1:16:13
  But anyway, have a good day. I know I will.
• 1:16:16
  Thanks. Bye.
• 1:16:17
  Bye.